2. The plaintiff's conjunctive claim is dismissed.

3...

In this regard, the defendant only appealed against the conjunctive claim, which is subject to the judgment of this court, is limited to the claim for damages caused by the tort.

2. Basic facts

A. On October 16, 2014, the Plaintiff: (a) transferred the patent right related to “D” to the Defendant (former trade name: C Co., Ltd.; and B Co., Ltd.) at KRW 100 million; and (b) concluded a contract for acquisition by transfer with the intent to transfer an advance payment of KRW 50,000,000 on October 24, 2014; (c) the Plaintiff received each balance of KRW 50,000,000 on April 30, 2015; and (d) the patent right was transferred within 15 days after the remainder payment date.

(hereinafter “instant contract”). (b)

On October 24, 2014, the Defendant paid KRW 49,500,000 to G Bank Account under the name of the Plaintiff (hereinafter “Plaintiff Account”) and paid KRW 47,800,000 on April 29, 2015.

C. On April 29, 2015, the Defendant paid KRW 47,800,00 to the Plaintiff was used as the Plaintiff’s purchase price of new shares. On April 30, 2015, the Plaintiff acquired the Defendant’s shares 95,143 shares (one share value of KRW 500).

On May 8, 2015, the Plaintiff is the Defendant.

The registration of transfer of patent rights mentioned in the subsection has been completed.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 9, the purport of the whole pleadings

3. E, who was in charge of managing the funds of the Defendant as the ancillary cause of the Plaintiff, had the Defendant remit the transfer proceeds of the patent right to the account under the Plaintiff’s name, and embezzled the money deposited in the said account without the Plaintiff’s consent.

Therefore, the plaintiff suffered loss due to the embezzlement of E, and the defendant should monitor the embezzlement of E as the user of E.